Introduction
It has been said that about everything in art and design has already been innovated. However, the redoing of the artwork is whatever brings a new look to the done art, hence making it look much more colourful. Therefore, based on the theory of redoing artwork, the paper below aims to compare and contrast different design houses, thus showing how they have redone their artwork. The compared designer is Giles Deacon. The research topics based on the redo of the artwork from these designers include Tapestry, techniques on knitting, crocheting or lacing, non-woven, quilting or fabric piecing, beading, and techniques of dye resist, among others. The research of art redo among these design houses has been based on making process, place, and time significance makers, among others.
Giles Deacon
Giles Deacon, with time, has changed the look of its artwork, especially female wear. Since the time it was founded in 1673, the company has been associated with different redos in its art design. This was revealed in 2015- 2016. In the year 2015, the design house launched “READY-TO-WEAR” which was art-redone in 2016 to what was referred to as “FALL 2016 CULTURE” following design started in the year 2004. Both of the models are fabric piecing, but there are features of beading which make them different. The 2015 plan was made of a coloured jacket, which was comprised of elements like sprouting feathers at the hand ends. However, in the case of 2016, though it was evident that there were feathers features imported from the previous design, in this case, it was a simple British hostess design. The feathered jacket was gone, so a simple dress was made that was long-sleeved with feathers attached to each side. The company in both of these designs uses plant motifs as symbology in textiles. However, through the use of different designs, the 2015 model seems to be processed as it has complicated features, while the 2016 seems to have used a real machine. This is because even by the look of the design, it looks simple and does not require a lot of processing. The style is made to target the female gender, hence causing the plan to be a trading item. The country where these designs were made, Paris, aims for Paris Culture. They were made to create the cultural significance of Britain, where the company originates. Therefore, the primary influence of using the British hostel design was the symbolism of British culture, although the plan had no political significance or climate. Thus, during the formulation of the model, fabrics were used to make the sprouting feathers and jackets, while the dress was made of cotton wool. According to research, another resource used in the design process was dye. This was to be used in the decoration of the feathers that were made, which, in this case, were black.
Work Cited
Caslin, Samantha. “Flappers, amateurs and professionals: the spectrum of promiscuity in 1920s Britain.” New Sociologies of Work. Routledge, 2016. 23-34.
Kim, Hye Eun. “A study on the characteristics and trends of sustainable fashion through Esthetica at London Fashion Week.” 17.2 (2015): 2015.
Malogne-Fer, Gwendoline. “A Dispute at the Lord’s Supper: Theology and Culture in the Mâohi Protestant Church (French Polynesia).” (2016): pp-35.
Cite This Work
To export a reference to this article please select a referencing stye below:
